The European Parliament has published a briefing paper entitled “Financing Ukraine’s recovery and reconstruction through the 2028–2034 Multiannual Financial Framework”, which focuses on the European Union’s spending priorities under its multiannual budget for 2028–2034.
One of the co-authors of the document is Dmytro Boyarchuk, an economist and chairman of the board at CASE Ukraine. The paper was co-authored with Marek Dombrowski, a researcher at CASE working for the European Parliament.
The document analyses how much financial support Ukraine may need over the next decade, how the EU should plan its assistance in the face of uncertainty, and why future support must take into account both a scenario of continued war and one of an end to active hostilities.
The authors’ key conclusion is that Ukraine will require ongoing budgetary support both during the war and after its conclusion. Whilst hostilities continue, the main priorities remain military aid, defence funding and support for the state’s core functions. Large-scale reconstruction during the war, in the authors’ view, is not rational: priority should be given to repairs to energy, transport and social infrastructure.
Once the active phase of the war has ended, reconstruction will become possible; however, Ukraine’s national budget will continue to require external support for some time to come. According to the authors’ estimates, the minimum public funding requirement for a ten-year post-war recovery stands at €196.5 billion, or around €19.7 billion per year. This estimate assumes active private-sector participation and therefore represents the lower limit of the necessary funding.
Separately, the researchers point out that the level of support for Ukraine proposed in the EU’s budgetary framework for 2028–2034 — €88.9 billion, or around €13.5 billion per year in 2025 prices — is insufficient given the scale of the needs. The authors emphasise that this amount is lower than Ukraine’s estimated minimum needs and does not fully account for the risks of reduced support from the US and the limited role of other donors.
Another important conclusion concerns the form of aid. The researchers note that an excessive reliance on loans fails to take into account Ukraine’s high level of public debt, which exceeds 100 per cent of GDP. Grant support should therefore play a much greater role.
The authors also emphasise that the conditions attached to the provision of aid should not only encourage reforms relating to European integration, macro-financial stability and the fight against corruption. Equally important is the need for a genuine improvement in the business and investment climate in Ukraine: predictable regulations, protection of property rights, and reform of the judicial system, law enforcement agencies and public administration.
The policy brief emphasises that Ukraine’s recovery cannot rely solely on external funding. For international aid to translate into sustainable economic growth, Ukraine must create conditions in which Ukrainian businesses can operate, invest, create jobs and attract private capital.